From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56064)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1RB9dv-000504-K3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:23:04 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1RB9du-0007Z9-KJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:23:03 -0400
Received: from mail-yw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.213.45]:50731)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1RB9du-0007Z1-FM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:23:02 -0400
Received: by ywm39 with SMTP id 39so931574ywm.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 11:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4E8B4F02.1010907@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 13:22:58 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1317738629.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<4E8B4E59.9030607@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E8B4E59.9030607@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] migration: Improve subsections
	detection
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

On 10/04/2011 01:20 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/04/2011 04:38 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> This series move the subsections detection code form:
>> - Look that it starts form 5
>> To:
>> - Look that it starts form 5 (SUBSECTION)
>> - Look at the length
>> - Look that length is bigger than section name
>> - Look at the idstr and see that it starts with the subsection name.
>>
>> Please review.
>>
>
> The original intent with subsections was to register them as a new vmstate
> section, with just a name relationship.
>
> Can we rename .subsections to .old_and_semi_broken_subsections, and introduce a
> new .subsections field that works properly in all cases?

That gets a bit hairy.  We don't really rely on section order today and I think 
this would introduce a section order requirement.  I don't think it's a problem 
and agree it's probably a better path but it does require a little bit of 
consideration.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>